The Chancellor’s Autumn Statement announced the introduction of a new exceptional 45% tax on the “extraordinary profits” of low-carbon electricity producers, via the Electricity Generator Levy (the Generator Levy).

The structure of European energy markets – where the marginal cost of the most expensive form of generation needed to meet demand determines the market price – means that high gas prices have created additional profits for some forms of generation versus generators who have to buy fossil fuels to generate electricity. While the substantial overhaul of the electricity market in Britain promised by REMA (on which the consultation closed last month) will aim, in part, to deal with the market consequences of major external shocks such as that caused by the invasion of Ukraine, the redesign and its implementation is not simple and therefore will inevitably take time. In the meantime, the government has estimated that low-carbon producers should contribute some of their additional income to public finances and support households and businesses through the current cost of living crisis. The Generator Levy is expected to bring in around £14 billion to the public sector over its lifetime.

The generator tax is to replace the Cost-Plus revenue limit (envisioned by the previous government as an effective cap on revenue from certain low-carbon generation) which was contemplated by the Energy Pricing Act, which was enacted last month – see our previous comment on this here.

Range and mechanics

The generator tax is described as a temporary measure that will apply to production between January 1, 2023 and March 31, 2028, regardless of when the sales contracts were entered into.

The generator tax will be applied to groups of companies producing electricity in the UK from renewable, nuclear and biomass sources. It will not apply to pumped hydro or battery storage and will not include revenue from the sale of ROC or capacity market payments.

‘Extraordinary profits’ are defined as the revenue (not profit) from electricity sold above £75/MWh (based on the aggregate revenue that a group of producers realizes during the relevant period at from in-scope generation at an average generation price above £75/MWh). MWh). Nothing has yet been said about the indexation of this threshold.

The average revenue per (accounting) period must therefore be greater than £75/MWh to trigger the charge. The government has said it considers there should be a provision for balancing and financial hedging costs (although details are not yet available), but otherwise this is structured as an income tax and not on profits. If unfairness to producers is to be minimized, language will need to be carefully crafted so as not to unfairly penalize groups’ hedging or trading strategies.

The tax will be limited to generators whose in-scope generation output exceeds 100 GWh over the relevant period and will then only apply to such “extraordinary profits” to the extent that they exceed £10 million.

Like the current Energy Profits Tax applicable to oil and gas producers (the scope and duration of which are to be extended under the same package), the Generator Tax will be administered by the through the corporate tax system – the tax is levied on a corporation as if its amount were an amount of corporation tax payable by it. The relevant calculation period will be aligned with the accounting period of the company in charge of managing the direct debit for the group.

Groups of consolidated companies

The Generator Levy therefore considers groups of companies on a consolidated basis. This is a significant change from the Energy Pricing Act’s approach, which focused on the individual producer (who might not have realized the market price due to hedging agreements). This change in approach adds a level of complexity that will require careful consideration to ensure it works without unintended consequences.

Where a group’s output is sold to third parties, the measure of revenue will be the revenue received from the third party by the relevant group member (regardless of whether it is ultimately sold by the producer). The treatment of intra-group consumption should be considered.

For energy companies that cover generation and supply, revenues related to final consumer supply will need to identify the relevant components of those revenues. Obviously, any misalignment between the entity responsible for the levy and the recipient of the revenue raises the prospect of cash flow problems for producers. There may also be time lags, depending on when revenue is recognized. We anticipate difficult questions regarding when the group monetizes electricity – for example, a group should not be allowed to trade in-scope electricity with another group at below-market prices, in order to keep the “realized prices” for its own production low.

It is recognized that production joint ventures may require special consideration (particularly where production is sold to stakeholders) – again, careful language will be required here for this to work as intended.

Groups with different minority investors in their generation assets may also face tax allocation issues.

The generator tax will not apply to electricity generated outside the UK and imported (but it will apply to electricity generated in the UK and exported).

cfd

It is stated that the producer tax will not apply to electricity “generated under a contract for difference” (where the producer reimburses the public sector for generation revenues above the applicable strike price) .

This wording may imply that generation by CfD holders prior to the start date under it will be subject to tax, which may raise an interesting debate around the scope of the law change protections and generation tax in the CfD.

The proposed exemption for CfDs may be an additional incentive for generators to enter into the “pot zero” CfDs contemplated under the Energy Prices Act.

Scope of the challenge

A side effect of structuring the measure as a tax under an Act of Parliament itself means that it will, in principle, be less likely to be challenged by judicial review than if the Secretary of State exercised the powers conferred on him. This may also impact any potential claims under the Energy Charter Treaty.

Continued investments in the sector

The government expresses the hope that the “temporary and proportionate” levy should not harm long-term investment as it only applies to part of the additional returns and electricity producers can still deduct the corporate tax investment. That remains to be seen. Critics will say the impact on cash flow itself can hamper the appetite for reinvestment. Unlike the Energy Profits Tax, where oil and gas producers can receive specific tax relief for reinvestment in the sector, there is no specific relief offered by the Generator Tax for reinvestment in new projects.

As noted earlier, investors able to make comparisons between the UK and EU investment landscapes for low-carbon generation will notice that the revenue cap for license holders EU for renewable energy generation (which applies as an effective cap rather than a levy on excess revenue) is set at 180 EUR/MWh. This will no doubt contrast unfavorably with the much lower level at which the generator tax begins to apply.

The Treasury has not provided detailed justification behind the £75/MWh threshold beyond stating that the level is significantly higher than the average wholesale price of electricity over the decade to 2021. The Energy Pricing Act did not indicate the threshold – it was to be left to delegated legislation.

Next steps

The details of the tax on generators will be defined in the finance bill. A draft of the relevant legislation is expected in mid-December.

Producers will want to carefully consider the position set out in the bill when it is released.

The Treasury said it would contact affected producers to discuss the implementation of the generator tax, although discussions of previous approaches to this issue have already taken place. Given that the bill is expected to be released in a few weeks, growers will need to react quickly.

Prineville Light and Water Company organized and the first power station was built in Prineville

On March 7, 1899, the Prineville Light and Water Company organized and the first power station was built in Prineville. The Yancey brothers were hired to transport the power plant from the Dalles, and it took seven round trips to bring the plant to Prineville. The factory was completed in May 1900 and power was provided by wood-fired boilers which produced steam to generate electricity. Electricity delivery began in December 1900.

The pioneering system was powered by a 50 horsepower boiler connected to an 18,000 watt dynamo. Prineville was the first town in central Oregon to have electric street lights. Bend and Redmond used coal lamps until 1910.

Electrical service was provided at a flat rate of five cents per month per candle for lights used until 10 p.m. and six cents if burned until midnight.

The service was irregular and the stops frequent and often prolonged. Electric and water company workers knew that when the lights started to dim and then went out, they had to go to the power plant to help the lone operator make repairs. The old power plant was located just north of Third Street

The company contracted to have firewood cut and stacked near the power plant and the 4ft long firewood was stacked on nearly an acre of land surrounding the plant. In 1901 a small rail system was built to transport the wood to the boiler and the rails were fitted with a turntable and a track.

In 1908, the Prineville Light and Water Power Company expanded its plant in anticipation of obtaining alternating current produced by the hydroelectric plants on the Deschutes and Crooked rivers. The company was acquired by the Deschutes Power Company in 1913 and new lines were completed to Prineville. The small factory established in 1900 was the precursor to a revolutionary new power system that changed the frontier of central Oregon.

Renewables can provide power during off-peak hours. But without the battery technology to store it efficiently, it is debatable whether Africa can reach its growth potential without the basic energy needed to industrialize its economies, says Greg Nott.

---

Africa urgently needs electricity to grow and develop as 600 million people on the continent currently do not have access to electricity. Electricity is an absolute necessity for Africa to improve its ability to achieve and advance the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The SDGs include the eradication of poverty and hunger, good health, world-class education, clean water and sanitation, job opportunities and economic growth – all of which require stable and affordable to energy.

Renewables can provide power during off-peak hours. However, without the battery technology to store it efficiently, it is debatable whether Africa can realize its growth potential without the power base needed to industrialize its economies. Baseload electricity has traditionally been provided by coal-fired power plants, natural gas-fired power plants, nuclear power plants, and some alternative fuels.

As rich countries come up with solutions to reduce carbon emissions, these countries must remember that Africa needs urgent support and basic energy infrastructure to meet its growth and development needs. Emphasizing that Africa keeps its carbon emissions low (currently just over 3%) without offering concrete solutions for economic acceleration could be tantamount to asking the continent to slow down its development and to stay in unfavorable conditions.

Many African leaders argue that it is grossly hypocritical to insist that Africans freeze their carbon emissions, let alone reduce them to already low levels. In a recent editorial, the Vice President of Nigeria, Oluyemi Oluleke Osinbajo, wrote in the Financial Times and criticized those who have “a naïve belief in leapfrogging, the assumption that, like skipping landlines to mobile phones, Africa can “jump” to new energy technologies”. Osinbajo doesn’t think it’s that simplistic or easy to tackle.

The one thing Osinbajo is certain of is that rich countries cannot come up with solutions that keep other countries poor. The outcome of such unfair proposals, he says, would be both predictable and devastating, with millions crossing the Mediterranean towards Europe in search of a carbon-intensive way of life.

Many of the world’s richest and most developed countries are locked into carbon-rich energy supply routes that make shifting to greener technologies perfect ideology but much more difficult to implement. However, the lack of energy infrastructure in Africa means that it may prioritize the use of certain clean energy technologies such as electric vehicles, hydrogen generation and carbon capture, creating a jump-start effect. -sheep.

As the developed world looks back on the energy strategies that underpinned its previous decades of industrialization – while counting the environmental and societal cost of the economic impact – we could argue that Africa benefits from the setback. This retrospective leaves Africa as a blank energy canvas ripe for a case study of a hybrid energy solution.

The fact that Africa has vast untapped potential in clean and renewable energy technologies is a common cause. Twenty-two nations on the continent use renewable energy as their main source of electricity, according to the Mo Ibrahim Foundation. Countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo sit on huge hydropower potential. At the same time, Namibia, with its long coastline and deserts, is well placed to harness wind, solar and possibly hydrogen energy.

Renewable energy solutions are cost effective and faster to build than coal or gas plants and will unlock climate finance. However, every African nation will need to create a strategy that ensures it has the energy intensity needed to run factories, create jobs, run schools and build the infrastructure for a young and rapidly growing urban population.

Our unique position is the ideal breeding ground for energy innovation. We must be creative in developing proposals and plans and in deploying funds to lead the way in this new era.

This week, as I attend COP27, I look beyond theoretical and ideological think tanks to find common threads that identify African solutions to Africa’s energy problems. I seek answers on where Africa can grow its economies using advanced sustainable technologies while accessing concessional finance from development partners. Partners who recognize our unique position and see the potential to propel our future.

Greg Nott is the Africa practice lead at Norton Rose Fulbright. He specializes in energy projects and transactions. New24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse opinions. The opinions of columnists published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the opinions of News24.

While most residents of junta-held towns like Mandalay and Yangon have started paying their electricity bills, a fierce boycott continues in resistance strongholds in the Sagaing and Magway regions.

By FRONTIER

In November 2020, Daw May Oo* and her entire family were among the millions who helped Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the National League for Democracy win a landslide re-election. When the military refused to accept the results and staged a coup, they did not hesitate to join in the mass protests.

“We joined all the strikes we could, including silent strikes and the boycott of bills and taxes paid to the Junta’s State Administrative Council,” the retired teacher said.

After the military responded to the mass protests with brutal violence, Yangon residents found creative ways to resist, including silent strikes, when shops in the city refused to open and refused to pay taxes or utility bills.

But at the end of October this year, May Oo’s long boycott came to an end, when her house was suddenly plunged into darkness.

“At first I thought the whole neighborhood was in the dark,” she said, but after talking to neighbors she soon realized her house had been singled out.

Faced with the prospect of living permanently without electricity, or paying her bill, May Oo finally gave in. She told Border her bill was 2 million kyat, or about $975 at the official exchange rate, and she saw many more at the township electricity office that day.

“We persevered until the end,” she said.

Ko Min Kyaw*, an activist with the Yangon University Students’ Union, said people in big cities now had no choice but to pay their bills or face severe reprisals.

“The military council controls Yangon and Mandalay,” he said.

The junta has ordered electricity officials to step up bill collection efforts from April this year, according to Ko Tun Zaw*, an electrical engineer who has worked at the Yangon Electric Supply Corporation for more than five years. .

“We have to cut the electricity to the houses where they don’t pay the bill. The cup was busiest in July,” he explained. “It happened in almost every township in Yangon.”

Residents of various townships in Yangon – including Lanmadaw, Latha, Sanchaung, Bahan and others – confirmed to Frontier that YESC officials cut off their electricity in July. The May Oo district seems to have been one of the last to disappear.

Like May Oo, Sanchaung resident Ko Win Aung relented after losing power in July.

“There were a lot of people like me who went to pay the bill because they were cut off,” he said. “All the residents in my neighborhood have paid. We cannot live in the dark.

The Independent Economists of Myanmar (IEM) claimed in a report last July that the regime was losing about 1 billion kyat a month due to the public boycott. Although based on Border According to recent interviews in Yangon, this income has probably increased significantly recently, particularly because people are forced to repay their accumulated debts.

Currently, Tun Zaw said there are “very few” people refusing to pay their electricity bills in Yangon.

“I don’t even keep the bill”

But elsewhere, the regime has still been unable to deploy its administration in the face of fierce armed resistance. Border found that residents of the dry zone of Sagaing and Magway regions, strongholds of the anti-coup People’s Defense Forces, continue to refuse to pay in large numbers.

In Ayadaw township in Sagaing, resistance to the army remains strong, as PDFs wage guerrilla warfare against regime forces. In these remote areas, some villages only started receiving public electricity in 2020.

“About six months before the military coup, our village had electricity,” Daw Aye Mi said. “After the coup, there was a strike and no one paid their electricity bill. electricity. No one dares to come and collect them because there is fighting in our region.

In Kalay Township, home to one of the region’s largest towns, residents say the boycott has narrowed the urban-rural divide. “People in the urban area are paying their bills, but on the rural side they are not paying because the army cannot control the countryside,” said a resident of Kalay town.

But in the city of Sagaing, many remain rebellious even in urban areas.

“Electricity staff send monthly bills to our homes. But we don’t pay,” said resident Daw Khin Thein*. “I didn’t even keep the bill; we don’t know where they are now.

The story is much the same in nearby Magway, also a hotbed of resistance.

“They don’t even cut off the electricity in the urban area, and we don’t know why,” said Aung Soe*, a resident of Yenangyaung Township in Magway who has refused to pay since the coup.

Tun Zaw, the YESC employee in Yangon, said he understood his colleagues in parts of Sagaing and Magway “don’t dare collect the bills” for fear of the ongoing conflict or being targeted for assassination.

“No one can guarantee your life if you go and get a bill,” he said.

Residents of the dry zone say they feel more justified in not paying because the regime is struggling to maintain a constant supply of electricity, though this is partly caused by the massive boycott and resistance attacks on electrical infrastructure.

“Every day there is a power outage,” said Aye Mi in Ayadaw township, adding that outages usually last about two hours.

According to the United States Chamber of Commerce, power generation increased from 3,711 MW in October last year to 2,665 MW in March this year. This decline is likely due to a combination of attacks on infrastructure, attacks on electricity personnel, public boycotts and general incompetence by the junta.

The junta’s electricity ministry did not respond to requests for comment, but the regime previously blamed the power shortage on resistance attacks and a rise in gas prices affecting LNG projects.

Stack pressure

Resistance groups have targeted many branches of the junta’s administration, from police stations to local government offices, and somewhat more controversially, electricity offices.

“The army pressures people to pay their electricity bills. The revolutionary forces are pressuring people to stop them from paying,” explained student activist, Min Kyaw.

Although such attacks may have been initially effective in deterring payments to the scheme and still appear to be effective in Magway and Sagaing, they are controversial as they endanger public officials and ordinary civilians. In July last year, Khit Thit reported that two people were killed in a bomb attack on an electricity office in Mandalay – a civil servant and a woman paying her bill.

“When I come to the office, I don’t feel safe,” said Tun Zaw, the YESC employee.

Like many others, Tun Zaw joined the mass protests against the coup but did not join the mass strike by civil servants, as he felt compelled to continue working to support his family. family.

“My life was like an ocean of problems. I had no choice,” he said.

Less controversial have been attacks on infrastructure, which do not bring the same level of risk to civilians. On the border of Kayah and Shan states, the PDF and the Karenni Nationalities Defense Force destroyed two electricity pylons connected to the Lawpita No. 3 hydroelectric power station in August last year.

“Yes, we destroyed the tower at that time,” a PDF Pekon official confirmed. Border. The power station provides electricity to major cities, and Pekon PDF claimed at the time that the attacked tower was connected to the heavily militarized capital of Nay Pyi Taw.

“This power line is mainly used by the military. We attacked it to stop their administration,” a KNDF spokesman said. Border.

While attacks on electricity infrastructure and offices appear to have decreased since last year, the KNDF spokesman said the group again attacked an electricity tower in Lawpita near the town of Moebye on November 3, as a battle raged for control of the city.

“Electricity is a main requirement for the SAC to run its administration,” he said, declining to say whether there have been fewer attacks this year, or whether the KNDF would step up attacks inside the country. coming.

“They need electricity to produce weapons and communicate in support of their military strategy.”

Khin Thein, from Sagaing city, said she would persist in her boycott until the army is no longer in power.

“Even if the regime does not fall, by not paying the electricity bill, we are showing our defiance,” she said. “If our mother Suu’s government returns to power, we will pay for it immediately,” she added.

The number of Yukon homes using electric heat last year was 4,038, according to figures released earlier this year by the Territorial Bureau of Statistics.

By Whitehorse Star on November 4, 2022

The number of Yukon homes using electric heat last year was 4,038, according to figures released earlier this year by the Territorial Bureau of Statistics.

The 2021 number represented an increase of 7.9% or 261 customers from 2020, the bureau’s report said.

It says the energy sector contributed $66.1 million to Yukon’s real domestic product last year, an increase of $2.4 million or 3.8% from 2020. .

The number of solar electric systems operating in the territory has increased significantly over the past nine years, from one in 2013 to 517 in 2021.

The increase in solar electric systems has also resulted in a substantial growth in the amount of generation exported to the grid after personal use.

In 2014, for example, production exported to the grid was six megawatt hours compared to 2,251 MWh last year.

Of the 35 Yukon farms that reported using renewable energy generation systems in 2021, the report notes, 33 used solar panels and two used wind turbines.

The average monthly percentage of total electricity generation from fossil fuels – diesel and natural gas – during the months of November, December, January and February has increased from 9.8% in 2017 to 22.2% in 2021 .

Of Yukon’s total generating capacity of 153.1 MW last year, hydroelectric plants had a capacity of 93.5 MW or 61.1%.

Diesel plants had an installed capacity of 46.4 MW or 30.3% of the total, followed by an installed LNG capacity of 13.2 MW or 8.6%.

Of the total installed generating capacity last year, Yukon Energy had an installed capacity of 132.3 MW or 86.4% of the total, while ATCO Electric Yukon had a generating capacity of 20.8 MW or 13, 6% of total.

The report notes that in 2020, fossil fuel generation accounted for 17.2% of the total, the sixth lowest in the country.

Between 2011 and 2020, the percentage of production by fossil fuels fluctuated, going from a low of 5.2% in 2013 and 2014 to a high of 19.6% in 2019.

The percentage of total electricity generated from LNG increased from 0.3% in 2016 to 9% in 2020, while the percentage generated from diesel increased from 5.3% in 2016 to 8.2% in 2020.

Ontarians struggling with the rising cost of living may notice something unusual when they check their next electricity bill.

The Ontario Energy Board (OEB) announced lower electricity costs for residential and small business customers, effective Tuesday. Depending on the rate plan, people will see price drops of up to two cents per kilowatt hour (kWh).

The drop in prices is mostly due to market changes, says Joel MacDonald, founder of Energyrates.ca, a website that compares energy prices.

“The grid’s peak demand is during the summer … typically it’s powered by air conditioners,” MacDonald said.

“So it would be typical to see a slightly lower rate during the winter than during the summer.”

MacDonald says the drop isn’t significant compared to last winter’s drop in Ontario, but he points out that other provinces are raising their rates – for example, Albertans are seeing increases ranging from 3 cents to 28 cents the kWh.

Prices for time-of-use and tiered packages will drop, according to the province’s electricity and natural gas regulator. This change will remain in effect until the end of April next year.

The OEB announced reductions to the Time of Use (TOU) plan, where customers are charged different amounts depending on when they use electricity, at all levels. Customers using weekday electricity during peak hours (7 a.m. to 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.) will now pay 15.1 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), which is down from the price of last winter of 17.0 cents per kWh.

The mid-peak rate (weekdays from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m.) went from 11.3 cents to 10.2 cents per kWh. The off-peak rate (weekdays from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. and all day on weekends and holidays) also fell to 7.4 cents from 8.2 cents per kWh.

Tiered pricing, where customers pay a flat rate for the first 1,000 kWh during the winter months and a higher rate if they go over that amount, also fell by just over a cent per kWh.

However, the Ontario Electricity Rebate, which provides a pre-tax rebate on electricity bills, was reduced from 17.0% to 11.7%.

MacDonald says now is a good time for Ontarians to reassess whether they want to be on a TOU or a tiered plan.

Savings depend on plan type

Ontario introduced smart meters in 2005, MacDonald says, which not only measure the amount of electricity used, but also the time of day the electricity is used.

He credits these meters with reducing the amount of electricity used by Ontarians since their introduction.

However, during the first year of the pandemic, the OEB gave residential and small business customers the option of being billed by TOU or by tiered plans.

MacDonald says tiered plans make more sense for most customers.

“For the time-of-use system to provide savings over the tiered system – assuming an average household – you would need to use more than 75% of your consumption during the period off peak.”

He says that figure is difficult to achieve because standard homes have base load consumption, driven by various appliances being on all the time.

With the tiered system charging 8.7 cents per kWh (effective Tuesday), MacDonald says savings are easier because the average household does not exceed the 1,000 kWh threshold needed to incur a higher rate.

“We know the average household uses 750 kWh.”

MacDonald says that according to the OEB, the average consumer who uses 60% of their electricity during off-peak hours will save 8% by switching to the tiered system.

Many Ontarians are still struggling with soaring costs

Even with some short-term savings, many Ontarians are still unable to pay their electricity bills.

“A lot of people are feeling the pressure right now with the rising prices of everything from groceries to gas,” said Neftali Bonilla of the Neighborhood Information Post, an organization that connects low-income people with support services.

“So it’s either they buy groceries or they pay their energy bill,” said Bonilla, who coordinates the organization’s energy assistance program.

He says many people, including seniors, young adults and single parents, have come to his group asking for help in the form of grant programs.

One such program, the Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LEAP), allows people to apply for assistance if they are behind on their energy bill and receive up to $1,000 to help pay for it.

Bonilla says they’ve seen huge increases in applicants.

“In 2021, we were able to help 411 households for the LEAP program,” he said.

“So far this year, from January to September, we have helped 873… For the month of October alone, we are looking at helping probably around 100 households.”

But MacDonald says Ontarians will never have to worry about having their electricity cut off during the winter because there is a disconnection ban between Nov. 15 and April 30.

“If you’re struggling with these exceptionally high bills, know that while it may hurt your credit, you won’t have anything offline until April 30.”

ISLAMABAD – The Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) is actively pursuing six hydropower projects to add more than 11,241 MW of environmentally friendly hydel electricity to the existing 9,443 MW hydel generation in coming years.

Wapda officials told APP here that currently the total installed capacity of 24 Wapda hydel power plants stands at 9,443MW and adding more than 11,241MW will bring it to 20,684.4MW.

Existing power stations included the Tarbela, Mangla, Ghazi Brotha, Neelum Jehlum and Warsak hydroelectric projects, which contributed about 25% of the total system capacity of 36,166 MW from all sources, they said. They said the net electricity production was around 32,000 GWh per year from said power plants. Sharing details of upcoming hydel power projects, they said Dasu hydropower project will bring in 4,320MW, Tarbela 5th extension 1,510MW, Mohmand dam 800MW, Diamer Basha 4,500MW, of energy Keyal Khwar 128 MW and Kurram Tang 83.4 MW at the national level. grid system.

Meanwhile, the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) has also developed several nuclear power projects to support Pakistan’s economic rise. The total installed capacity of nuclear power plants connected to the national power grid was 3,530 MW, which included the 1,330 MW Chashma nuclear power project and the 2,200 MW Karachi nuclear power project.

A battle is brewing around the “roof of Europe” for the planet’s most precious resource.

Abundant for centuries, the limpid waters Leaving the Alps could become increasingly contested as climate change and melting glaciers affect the lives of tens of millions of people in the years to come.

Italy wants them for spring and summer crop irrigation. Swiss the authorities want to block the flows to ensure that their hydroelectric plants can start when needed.

For the first time in four years, after a pandemic lull, government envoys from eight Alpine countries are meeting today to discuss their water issues.

As part of the Alpine Convention, a group created 30 years ago to help coordinate mountain life, recreation and limited resources, nations are meeting in the town of Brig in southern Switzerland.

Countries, ranging from the small principality of Monaco to small Slovenia to powerhouses like France, Germany and Italy, have given much attention to what is known as the “Simplon Alliance “.

Named after an alpine pass between Italy and Switzerland, it aims to make transportation more respectful of the environment, in particular by favoring rail over road and public transport over private cars in the mountains.

How are the Alpine countries adapting to climate change?

Global warming causing a worrying narrowing In the alpine glaciers this year, especially in Switzerland, the question of water freezing in the mountains, or raining and snowing on them, is becoming increasingly important.

Conservationists say the water jockey is not being treated with enough urgency – and want Alpine countries to do more to talk about the future of the resource.

This is nothing new: Turkey and IraqIsraelis and Palestinians are among the many countries and peoples who suffer from water problems.

But well-irrigated and relatively wealthy Europe has been far above these problems, harvesting abundant water resources for agriculture, hydroelectricity, Ski stations and human consumption.

The “9th report on the state of the Alps” – drawn up by the Swiss hosts and due for approval on Thursday – notes that the water supply is a “particularly urgent problem”. Indeed, the Alps are a huge reservoir of water, which ultimately flows for the benefit of some 170 million people along some of Europe’s most famous rivers, including the Danube, PoRhine and Rhone.

“Drinking water supply, industrial production, agricultural productivity, hydroelectricity and other uses all require constant availability of alpine water,” reads a near-final version of the report, viewed by The Associated Press. .

“Climate change puts these functions under pressure, glaciers are decreasing and rainfall patterns are constantly changing. Therefore, he adds that “reduced water quantities and limited reliability of water supply will be a major problem in the decades to come”.

Which European countries have the most water problems?

While Alpine resorts and villages depend on water, the main upstream users are Swiss hydroelectric power stations, which want to conserve water until it is most needed to power turbines which provide around 60% of the country’s electricity.

But the biggest consumers of water are downstream. Industrial areas like Grenoble and Annecy in France, capital of Austria Viennaand areas around Bolzano, in Italy’s South Tyrol, are likely to feel an impact.

Cities south of the Alps, particularly in France and Italy with their drier climates, are more likely to experience water shortages than cities in the north, according to the report. “This is particularly true of intra-Alpine dry valleys like Valle d’Aosta in northwestern Italy, already affected by significant water stress.”

Activists call for greater action to protect water resources in the Alps

Kaspar Schuler, director of CIPRA International, a commission dedicated to protecting the Alps based in tiny Liechtenstein, said governments had taken no steps to tackle the problem as they should – setting up task forces , expanding research or suggesting ways that water can be better shared in the future.

“We – the observer organizations – are happy that they have it on the agenda, but we are really surprised that it is so vague,” Schuler said in a recent interview. “They are aware of the fact that this will be the big problem in the future. But they behave like it’s not that important yet.”

He suggested that many have become too complacent about the abundant waters of the Alps – and those days may soon be over.

“Until now, all non-Alpine countries – the plains – were happy that the Alps offer so much: landscape for leisure and sports, Ski stationsand water as much as everyone needs,” Schuler said. “They also provided peak power and on-demand hydro power.

“So far everyone has been happy and the Alps have delivered,” Schuler said. “Going forward, it will be a battle … over these resources, because the lack of water, in particular, can really hurt a lot of people.”

Can COP27 help stop the melting of glaciers in the Alps?

State Secretary Bettina Hoffmann, who represents Germany’s Environment Ministry in Brig, said her country is working to “package” sustainable water issues into the broader context of tackling the climate crisis. – the centerpiece of the UN climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, from 6 November.

“Alpine countries need to act on two levels: only resolute climate action that stops global warming can preserve the remaining glaciers,” she said. “But at the same time, we have to adapt to changes in the water balance both in the Alps and in the rivers fed by water from the Alps.”

She called for “in-depth exchanges on how to protect the water cycle in the Alps” and suggested that countries in the region share best practices and ideas. “We need to involve all stakeholders, from tourism to agriculture to the water supply sector.”

Tim Buckley, director of renewables investor Climate Energy Finance, said the high gas price combined with coal-fired plant outages and a cold spell have all combined to drive up electricity prices .

Buckley points out that wholesale electricity prices are only around 30% of the retail cost of electricity, with transmission and distribution costs accounting for around 50%.

Therefore, the cost of transportation will have the biggest impact on electricity prices, he says. Since transmission tariffs are regulated and based on the cost of capital of the transmission networks, they are very sensitive to interest rates. Therefore, while wholesale electricity prices will fall, it is unclear how much overall electricity prices will fall due to rising interest rates.

There is a common view in the electricity industry that the cost of transitioning the economy to renewable energy will drive up electricity prices.

“It’s difficult and expensive and likely to increase energy bills [up] in the short term,” said Andrew Richards, CEO of the Energy Users Association of Australia. Financial analysisEnergy and Climate Summit.

The cost of modernizing Australia’s energy system will be enormous. According to the Australian National Electricity Market Operator, around $320 billion will be needed to develop, operate and maintain generation, storage and future grid investments in the NEM through 2050.

Buckley points out that because the wind and solar power that will be used to generate much of Australia’s green electricity is intermittent, more capacity will be needed to replace coal.

About 20 gigawatts of renewable energy would be needed to replace 10 gigawatts of coal, as renewable energy only runs about 30% of the time, compared to about 60% for current coal-fired generators in Australia.

And that’s just to replace the power generation capacity that Australia currently has.

Amanda McKenzie, chief executive of the Climate Council, said demand for electricity will increase dramatically as the wider economy decarbonizes and fossil fuels are replaced with green electricity, in electric cars for example. .

According to some estimates, the amount of electricity needed will increase fivefold, she says.

This amount of additional electricity would give Australia the opportunity to become a major manufacturer and exporter of manufactured goods.

“It’s something that seems blue sky but if we move away from exporting fossil fuels, Australia needs to think very seriously about what we export and if there are opportunities,” she said. declared.

According to CSIRO’s latest GenCost report, renewables remain the cheapest new power generation option in Australia, although inflation and supply chain disruptions are likely to put cost reductions on hold for the next year.

The 2021-22 report confirms previous years’ findings that wind and solar are the cheapest source of electricity generation and storage in Australia, even taking into account the additional integration costs resulting from generation variable of renewable energies, such as energy storage and transmission.

The report assumes that cost reductions for all technologies will stagnate over the next 12 months as tight global supply chains take longer to recover from the pandemic.

However, after the end of the current inflationary cycle, solar, wind and batteries should all continue to be cheaper.

McKenzie says that ultimately Australia will have the cheapest electricity in the world due to our abundant supply of renewable energy.

The amount of renewable energy produced by different states varies widely, according to data from the Clean Energy Council.

In Tasmania, it is 99.9% thanks to its hydroelectric production capacity. South Australia comes next with 66.5%, followed by Victoria with 33.4%. Despite its abundant sunshine, Queensland has the lowest proportion of renewable energy in its energy mix, at less than 20%.

Wind accounts for about a third of renewable energy generation, followed by small-scale solar accounting for about a quarter, then hydroelectricity.

A shortage of energy resources forced the Moldovan state electricity transmission operator to declare an alert mode.

The electricity transmission operator in Moldova – the state enterprise ‘Moldelektrila’ – announced today, Friday, October 21, an alarm mode due to a shortage of energy resources.

A statement on the company’s website read: “State-owned company Moldelektrila warns all interested parties about the presence of an alarm mode in Moldova’s electricity market. On October 21, 2022, the supplier Energocom announced the presence of an electricity shortage, which is not covered by commercial electricity supply contracts”.

Under alarm conditions, a power shortage may persist, requiring preventive measures or minimizing the consequences. No power outages are expected for the coming weekend, but it is not possible to predict the situation for a longer period.

“We reiterate the authorities’ appeal to consumers to make efforts to save electricity during peak hours, thus minimizing the risk of imbalance in the energy system. Otherwise, to balance the energy system, it will be necessary to resort to the limitation of electricity consumption by closing the installations allowing the consumers to use the electricity through the operators of the electricity distribution networks”, continues the communicated.

Earlier in the day, Premier Energy – which supplies power to central and southern regions of Moldova – warned consumers of possible “gradual” blackouts due to energy shortages in the country. Moldova is experiencing an energy crisis due to rising resource prices amid the shutdown of electricity exports from Ukraine.

Until October 15, the Moldovan authorities planned to buy 33% of the electricity needed from the Ukrainian companies Energoatom and Ukrhydroenergo. Deputy Prime Minister of Moldova Andrei Spinu said that Chisinau agreed with Tiraspol to increase the volume of energy production at Moldavskaya GRES.

Moldovan authorities have urged residents of the republic to save electricity in the morning and evening, while state institutions have received instructions to reduce energy consumption, as reported 1prime.ru.

_____________________________________________________________

Thank you for taking the time to read this article. Don’t forget to come back and check it out The weekly euro news website for all your up-to-date local and international news and remember, you can also follow us on Facebook and instagram.